Reason's Why Police Go To "Secure" Radio Systems

[radiolalaland]

Police scandal hits Edmonton; top cop on leave

http://policescandal.notlong.com/

Wonder how long before this system http://www.radioreference.com/modules.php?name=TRSDB&sid=1328

goes EDACS Digital :?: :?:


I think this story has been goin on for some time now.

If this is any word of thought, if public safety departments wanted total 'secure' radio system's they'd be using EDACS Digtal system's more than anything. I guess Erricson or whoever takes care of those types of system's aren't pushing hard enough like Motorola is.

 

[mikewazowski]

What does this have to do with encryption?

The attorney general was reading over transcripts which were no doubt prepared from logging tapes.

Even if the system was secure, the logging tapes would still be accessible and nothing would be different.

Monitoring of the radio system had nothing to do with this case. It's not even mentioned in the article.

 

[radiolalaland]

Can't recall the original story from back when this first came about.

But I'm sure there was mention that a 'scanner' was used to inform the tipster.

What does this have to do with encryption?

The attorney general was reading over transcripts which were no doubt prepared from logging tapes.

Even if the system was secure, the logging tapes would still be accessible and nothing would be different.

Monitoring of the radio system had nothing to do with this case. It's not even mentioned in the article.

 

[DaveH]

But I'm sure there was mention that a 'scanner' was used to inform the tipster.

I heard an early-morning news report on CBC radio, and "scanner" was definitely mentioned. A bit later was another comment, something to do with "limiting" this kind of access, or some words to that effect, which is a bit concerning (what they actually meant is another thing...)

Dave

 

[radiolalaland]

Here's the link I was looking for.

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Edmonton/Kerry_Diotte/2004/11/24/727912.html

I wonder, what was said in the duration of this case, about the fact of being tipped off by the guy in the newsroom listening to the scanner.

But I'm sure there was mention that a 'scanner' was used to inform the tipster.

I heard an early-morning news report on CBC radio, and "scanner" was definitely mentioned. A bit later was another comment, something to do with "limiting" this kind of access, or some words to that effect, which is a bit concerning (what they actually meant is another thing...)

Dave

 

[scnnr]

If this kind of nonsense goes on in Police Dept's. it is really sad.
All the more reason for the Cities and their Council members to tell the Police NO Way when they come hat in hand looking for a fully Pro voice Digital system.

As for the scanner mention All Newsrooms have had scanners for ever. Nothing new there. Like Mike said, all an Attorney General needs to do is get the transcripts, and even copies of the original tapes for an investigation.

Randy

 

[Jay911]

As for the scanner mention All Newsrooms have had scanners for ever.

And, those who don't have scanners have radios bought from the police/emergency service agencies with talkgroups of the emergency agencies' choice programmed into the radios as receive-only. (i.e. Calgary Sun, etc). The radio manager can put any individual unit into radio_idle (i.e. expensive paperweight) if a media outlet is abusing their 'privilege'.

 

[SCPD]

Perhaps the newly unemployed chief will move to toronto to take over from fantino? oh boy, digital for toronto...and all the media in jail. could get interesting :evil:

 

[mciupa]

The #1 reason the police go for secure radio systems is perhaps the
best reason

officer safety

Who would argue against that ?

 

[halatos]

I'll see your officer safety, and raise you a corruption.

The #1 reason why law enforcement should never be allowed to encrypt -anything- is so that corruption can be discovered and handled promptly.

Everyone knows that the best IA department a law enforcement organization can possibly ask for is an informed public that knows what the officers are doing. Criminals are usually too foolish to understand how a scanner works. I'm not. I think that trying to use "officer safety" as justification to hide what the police are up to is just plain nonsense.

 

[Jay911]

The #1 reason the police go for secure radio systems is perhaps the
best reason

officer safety

Who would argue against that ?

Probably the police officer in a place where digital has been equated to secure, and has gone from:

Who's back there? Let me see your hands! If I'm going to send in the dogs if you don't come out!

to:

Who dREBVfngt let GNARFburrrpwheeet!io the dogs GNNNNNNNNNNNNK! out!

 

[SCPD]

Officer safety I have no problem with.

A secure radio system providing that safety I doubt.
A quality, reliable radio system, proper training and skills to deal with potentially deadly situations, sufficient manpower resources to handle calls, good, powerful weapons, alternate weapons to choose from and a good bullet proof vest...THESE are much more important than a "secure" radio system.
How many lives have been saved by a department having a "secure" radio system? The average criminal doesn't think far enough in advance to go out and buy a scanner and sit and monitor comms while breaking the law. That doesn't mean it hasn't happened. But with the millions of dollars spent on these encrypted systems you really have to ask yourself if the money could not be spent better elsewhere. There have been instances in the U.S. where secure radios have been stolen and remained active long enough for criminal activity.

Monitoring problems aside, I'd rather know that when I call for help there are sufficient police resources available to respond...instead of a lonely, encrypted dispatcher voicing for "any unit to clear and attend...I have no units available...any unit..."

Let's face it, since cell phones went mainly digital and scanners eliminated the cellular bands when police need secure that is what they use...or a good old fashioned land line. At least the police I know do...but maybe we're all old fashioned?

The #1 reason the police go for secure radio systems is perhaps the
best reason

officer safety

Who would argue against that ?

As I was originally posting this message a buddy of mine called...on a good old fashioned land line. He's a cop. Been one for 22 years. Told him about this message and his comment is: Don't care if the radio is encrypted, auto translater, flashing lights, buzzers, hot naked chick on the other end with video capable....AS LONG AS IF I AM IN TROUBLE AND KEY THE MIKE I CAN GET THROUGH WITHOUT STATIC AND ACTUALLY GET A RESPONSE. THAT, my friend is officer safety.

 

[N_Jay]

. . . .
Let's face it, since cell phones went mainly digital and scanners eliminated the cellular bands when police need secure that is what they use...or a good old fashioned land line. At least the police I know do...but maybe we're all old fashioned? . . . .

What the phone line is secure? :evil:

That is a breading ground for corruption and deciete.
We shoudl insist taht all communications by public officials and employees shoudl be in the open.

They should have to allow free wire taps on all Police telephone calls! :twisted: :wink: :twisted: :wink: :twisted:

 

[I_10_92]

I think that Officer Safety is the key here. When police operations require 'surprise' or when sensitive information has to be transmitted, then I do think that there should be a safe, secure and fast way to do that. Hence the radio encryption. I don't think that encrypting a whole system is very good idea. We ovbiously have alot of people here who enjoy the hobby, and who listen for education, as well as entertainment. Not only for people as a hobby, but as well as the media outlets. The media has a job to do, and that is to present the news. Who likes to be spoon fed? Not I.

 

[mrcpu]

I think that Officer Safety is the key here. When police operations require 'surprise' or when sensitive information has to be transmitted, then I do think that there should be a safe, secure and fast way to do that. Hence the radio encryption. I don't think that encrypting a whole system is very good idea. We ovbiously have alot of people here who enjoy the hobby, and who listen for education, as well as entertainment. Not only for people as a hobby, but as well as the media outlets. The media has a job to do, and that is to present the news. Who likes to be spoon fed? Not I.

Who watches the watchers?

 

[radiolalaland]

These people do. :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

"All Eyes on You"
"A San Jose group aims to keep the police in line "

http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/02.23.05/copwatch-0508.html

Who watches the watchers?

 

[I_10_92]

Wow.. some people seem to have too much time on their hands. I mean yeah, we hire cops so that they can protect the community, but when the public takes it upon themselves to "police the police" then maybe there is a staffing/leadership issue? What will happen if these copwatchers gets shot? Hrmm.. something to ponder..

Also, I dont really trust those bankers, maybe i'll set up a video camera and watch them all day Damnit... i need to hug a tree.. i mean cut it down ! muhaha.. damn hippies

 

[moonbounce]

I find it kind of humours when the police are asking for the publics' help to solve a crime. Maybe if we could hear them we could help them. Officers safety,sure that is why we gave them guns, vests backup, radios, dogs, helicopters, tasers, batons, special vehicles, special squads ect, etc.

I have commented on this before but in my opinion, it has to do with economics. When you don't know what the police are doing, how can you complain when they take half an hour to respond to you call for their assistance. Truth being that they don't have enough police to cover the publics saftey let alone their own. But if you can't hear them, then they can tell you whatever excuse they want to cover their behinds.

Know any cops? I bet if you did you would find out that some nights one cop could be left covering a very very big area by himself, and know one is ever the wiser. in my opinion only, digital radios only drive a wedge between the public and police. They are now like a secret society. Far removed from the average Joe/ Sally. Anyways, DR are hear to stay and there aint nuthin gonna change that. Oh Well.

 

[jellotor]

While I agree that digital encrypted radio systems do tend to drive a wedge between police and the media/public, I believe there are some other reasons to chose a digital system over an analog one, such as the difference in bandwidth required for the two types of systems.

In the end, police services who have had bad experiences with scanner listeners (both in the hobby and professional) will no doubt be considering some sort of analog or digital encryption anyway, regardless of whether or not their system is P25, ProVoice or anything else.

 

[12VoltInstaller]

I agree with the safety of the officers should come first. BUT, with the way some radio systems are working they are actually putting the officer at risk. Ericsson or MA/COM not figuring out problems with ESK BEFORE trying to force it into an actual system that is the officer’s life line, is not thinking about the officer’s safety. This is the only system I really know of problems, but I bet there is more. I understand that 9-11 has caused alot of uneasiness among everyone. But, police, EMS and fire were not the target. WE were. I don’t think that in anything I have heard so far that it says anything about a scanner being used for 9-11 or anything under those lines.
I don’t think its rite, fair or safe for use to be kept in the dark. Hypothetical: Hey two neighborhoods down a man killed his family and fled on foot. I wander what that noise was in the backyard? Well it’s gone now. Next day hey look on the news and they still have not found him. Wow look at those foot prints in the back yard. If I was able to listen I could have pointed someone in the rite direction. Well you get the point.
All I'm saying is yes it is good for the officers to feel safe with their communications. But on the other side how many times have you heard of someone setting up with a gun and scanner to try to take out PD. If you have enliten me, that way I have a better understanding.
Sorry about the book, just trying to get point across and keep discussion going.